The need for criteria on reporting treatment outcomes.
Early reports that established the success of osseointegration and the survival of implants or prostheses measured the outcome in a number of case series studies. From the standpoint of scientific rigor, the case series design is among the weakest available. Patients have reported that they are better off basing their judgment on their own values and experiences. It is unlikely that they use implant or prosthesis survival as their only measures. This article examines the existing measures within a classification, the problems with developing relevant new measures, and reviews some desirable outcome measures attributes.
Anderson
J D
JD
Department of Prosthodontics, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
D001294:Attitude to Health; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous / Q000191:economics / Q000523:psychology / Q000592:standards*; D015921:Dental Implants / Q000191:economics / Q000523:psychology / Q000592:standards*; D017048:Health Care Costs; D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment; D008409:Mastication; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000145:classification / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011153:Population; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012107:Research Design; D012945:Social Values; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D015921:Dental Implants